qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] OVMF, Q35 and USB keyboard/mouse


From: Gabriel L. Somlo
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] OVMF, Q35 and USB keyboard/mouse
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 10:06:58 -0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

Hi Gerd & Laszlo,

On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 09:59:27AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 09/10/14 08:31, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > 
> > What happens if you build ovmf with uhci but without ehci driver?  Does
> > that work?
> 
> I'm glad I happened to suggest the same. ;)

Commenting out MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/EhciDxe/EhciDxe.inf from
OvmfPkgX64.[dsc,fdf] doesn't change anything, I still get no mouse
movement and "usb-kbd: warning: key event queue full" after a few
keypresses.
 
> >> Not sure how I'd force the keyboard and mouse onto the default uhci1
> >> and/or uhci2 (from the qtree perspective), since they're given empty
> >> IDs by default (and my qemu command line kung-fu is weak in this area).
> > 
> > Pure uhci working fine hints it most likely is a bug somewhere in the
> > port routing code.  Could be in ovmf, but could be qemu too.  You can't
> > force it from outsize, port routing is guest business.

If it's in QEMU, it's only tickled by the OVMF + OSX combination.
Fedora works (around it) fine, and everyone's happy when using
SeaBIOS (and Chameleon, in OSX's case).

BTW, when I do something like this:

-usb -device ich9-usb-uhci1,id=uhci1 -device usb-kbd,bus=uhci1.0 \
     -device ich9-usb-uhci2,id=uhci2 -device usb-mouse,bus=uhci2.0

I get an additional pair of uhci1 and uhci2 devices in qtree (at PCI
00:03.0 and 00:04.0, respectively). OS X "System Information" shows
these two instead of the default uhci[1,2] (which are still shown
in qtree at pci 00:1d.0 and 00:1d.1); It shows the default uhci3 at
pci 00:1d.2, and the default ehci.

With this configuration, keyboard and mouse work just fine on OSX+OVMF.
Not sure, but hoping this provides some useful information to you.

I'm still poring over the rest of the stuff you said, which is a
slightly slower process :)

Thanks much,
--Gabriel



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]